Some thoughts on this please

[bobbyboulders]

Hey guys,

I work in a college library and we are just about to start working on a new site. We are hoping to make it nice and user friendly and as accessible to all as possible. It was going to be done in tables, but it now appears that CSS are the way forward. I am at present catching up on CSS.

That said, however, the college is considering using an external contracter to do the new site. These people have already done the college site. http://www.spd.dcu.ie/main/index.html

I have run this through the html validator but, there looks like there's no doctype, and it also looks like they've used tables. When I asked about this I was told, that tables weren't used and that the code was all server side, caused the contracters use Contribute. Which sounds like cant to me.

The site itself isn't very user friendly

So I was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on the college site, and as a result if it would be a good idea for the library site to be done similarly by these people? Or might a fresh approach be preferable? It being a state educational site there's a (legal?)responsibility for it to adhere to best practice.

Thanks,
Neal.

[scragar]

the mixture of CSS AND tables does nothing to make it any better, the pressence of such an unfrendly URL makes it instantly disliked(remember people short=sweet).

It's proberly not in serverside, it's a HTML document for the most part.

The links to files on a different folder don't require a full URL, something like "news" works just as well as "news/index.shtml" and that mouseover should be done using hover from CSS.

"more >>" should be changed to something easier to spot and follow.

[KDLA]

Hi -
I'm the webmaster for a state's library and archives, and it's nice to see someone else concerned about a library website!

As a library, we strive towards designing for the average patron. There's really no "best practice," because the needs of patrons can be so varied, even based on locality alone. However, most libraries do strive towards equitable access, whether that is in the library or in the "virtual" library. If your library has visually impaired or physically handicapped patrons or has services online that cater to these patron groups, then Accessibility is a must and shouldn't be disregarded by whomever will be designing your site.

As to the website you asked for review -

The concern you have regarding tables is true: this looks like a tables-based layout.

(You might find out if this company is paid by the hour or by the job. Many designers who are paid by the job use quick fixes like tables to get the project over with, so they can move onto the next. They don't want to spend the tedious hours committed to CSS positioning and accessibility mark-up.)

Beyond the tables-issue, this company has not attempted to make the existing page accessible with summaries, alt tags, or labels.

From a design standpoint, they've also relied heavily upon images, with hardly any text at all - not good for those using older browsers or dial-up modems. And, lastly, the tiny font surrounded by minimal whitespace makes scanning the page for pertinent information very difficult for both the visually-impaired and/or older users - not to mention students in a hurry!

I'd recommend that you look elsewhere, just to see what else is available. The only thing it will cost you is some time.

Good Luck -

[Green-Beast]

Yeah, no DTD, and so many tables it looks like a funiture outlet. Not at all impressive, and obviously they are trying to pull the wool over your eyes.

You're right on about using Div and CSS... It IS the way to go. I mean the control over layout alone is worth it, not to even meniton the myriad styles at your disposal. Hopefully for you and the library, you get to do the site. At least you have the right ideas in your head.

[Sir Jake]

Yeah, tables tables everywhere. They lied. Why?

If you look at their site it looks professional, (to be taken serious). We know it has tables but does it's users? They probably don't even care, they are there for what the site has to offer.

In that site there's a link entitled 'Library' and it looks silly compared to www.spd.dcu.ie . Library has a welcome page like a blog with a wall paper bg to boot and uses tables. It looks like it was made in the 80s, (not to be taken serious).

It is always wise to check out the competition not to copy them but for inspiration and to see if they have missed something you might capitalize on. Try www.harvard.com they also have no doc and use tables hmmm...I wonder if they lie about it too.

[Green-Beast]

I don't know man, I didn't even follow the link. If they tell you they didn't use tables and they do it seems, um, less than truthful.

[KDLA]

I agree with the previous posting regarding the issue of 'truthfulness.' A contract relationship should be based on fulfilling the needs of, in this case, your library, not the quirks of the design company doing the work.

You wouldn't buy a car with parts of the engine duct-taped together, no matter how much you liked the exterior. Likewise, you shouldn't pay for work that is, on the surface, great looking and find that the "working parts" of it are shoddily produced.